A. Do you know what a “contrarian” is? They go against the grain – against the flow, etc. There is a sense in which all Christians are to be contrarians That’s partly what Romans 12:1-2 teach – stop being conformed. "Contrarian" does NOT mean “contrary” in terms of attitude. What I would like to do is establish a few premises with which I hope you can agree, then present what may well be a contrarian view on the meaning of Ezra 9 & 10 - (regarding divorce)

PREMISE #1 - God reveals men’s flaws along with their triumphs. This may well be (in part) to keep us from idolizing imperfect men (yet it happens frequently – and, it seems, often in churches) Consider – Moses David Solomon Peter

PREMISE #2 - Not every word of Scripture is an exhortation for us to do something. Many Scriptures warn us AGAINST certain things. Some Scriptures provide an example for us to follow – others an example of what not to do. In certain cases, it may not be crystal clear whether the Scripture is an example to be followed or is recorded for another purpose. There is the old joke teaching against using random verse selection to know the revealed will of God for you. It goes something like this – Open to Matt 27:5 and read that Judas went out and hanged himself; Open to Luke 10:37 and read “Go and do thou likewise” This is NOT the way to read / study / understand the Bible, nor is it the way to determine God’s revealed will for your life. Speaking of finding God’s will for your life, let me introduce you to an example of contrarian thinking. If you disagree with this contrarian example, you may not be receptive to the main one I wish to present. On the other hand, if you DO agree, then you will see how the process works and hopefully be able to consider the facts that I present. The example is found in Judges 6:1,6,7-10 Gideon enters the scene 6:11-16 Gideon tests God 6:17-23 (esp. v.22-23) Remember Gideon had NO New Testament, no O.T. prophets, etc. 6:25 God is speaking to Gideon ! 6:34 Spirit of God is upon Gideon ! 6:36-40 Faith ? ? ? ? Is this a formula to be followed in the future? An Rx? God’s “allowing” doesn’t make it the standard any more than God’s delay in judging sinners when they sin is not a sign of God’s condoning an action

B. FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Question #1 – was the “revival” as big a revival as many seem to think ?

Question #2 – was the commanded divorce truly “of God” ?

I’d like to deal with #2 first. The issue is the Hebrew intermarriage with the peoples of the lands (Ezra 9:1-2) “In the end he declared such marriages were transgressions against the Lord God of their fathers, and he agreed with the words of Shecaniah that the defendants must ‘put away all the wives, and such as are born of them’ (Ezra 10:3, 10-11)”

My “contention” is that Ezra rendered a wrong judgment. And Two Wrongs do NOT make a right! God’s word is clear in stating the covenants that Israel was to follow See Exodus 34:10-17 and Deut. 7:1-6 But, the law is NOT clear what to do with covenants made in violation of God’s law Cf 1 Cor. 7:12 ? The intent, or spirit, of the law is clear – to prevent Israel from being snared or led into the worship of pagan gods. The central issue TO GOD was avoidance of false worship. I hope to come back to this point in a moment. Did Ezra use legal precedent to help guide his decision? No. See Joshua 9:14-15 – Israel entered into a forbidden covenant with the Gibeonites. When the wrong was exposed, Israel did NOT break the treaty and slay or drive out the Gibeonites! See Josh. 9:18 Israel created a conflict of God’s law. They entered a forbidden covenant, BUT….. The law ALSO forbade breaking a vow – see Lev. 19:12 and Numbers 30:2 Joshua kept the Gibeonite covenant though it should never have been made ! (see Josh. 9:27). Did God agree ? First, There is no indication of any curse, judgment, rebuke, etc. against Joshua for this. (although there would certainly be consequences for it !) Second, God assisted Joshua in keeping the covenant when Gibeonites were attacked in Joshua 10. Third, many years later, God punished Israel in 2 Sam. 21:1 when king Saul violated the old covenant with the Gibeonites “Had Ezra applied this precedent, he could have concluded that the Hebrews who had intermarried with the people of the land, while clearly violating God’s prohibition, should not add sin to sin by now breaching their marriage vows and casting out their children to be fatherless.” So what SHOULD Ezra have done? [ Monday morning quarterbacking ?] Remember God’s intention – the spirit of the law It was about idolatry and false worship. The purpose of the covenant restriction was to accomplish the greater purpose of worshipping only God ! So, did they effectively remove the pagan things and restore proper worship? Didn’t the “revival” do this ? Contrarian contention #2 is that – No, it did not. “A truly revived people would be open-heartedly faithful and obedient to the Lord; and, according to His covenant with Israel, He would bless them.” Did that happen? See Neh. 1:3 See Neh. 1:6-7 See Neh. 9:2; 10:28-30 See Neh. 13:6-7 Then see Malachi (a contemporary of Ezra and Nehemiah) Mal. 2:16.